jvigier
Premium
join:2002-01-17
Wells, ME
| Hmmm...this sounds familiar
I wonder if the next study from these losers will prove that McCarthyism was a good thing and that Nixon was our best president.
I know these kinds of people, who use lies, deceit and any other means necessary to fightt anything and everything that doesn't put loads of cash into their wallets...where I come from we call "extreme right" |
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | It's simple folks...
Deploy or get the F out of the way. As for 'socialism'...nice try industry whores...broadband infrastructure is no more socialism than the interstate highway system or public libraries.
If private industry spent 1/2 as much time trying to please customers as they do kissing the ass of politicians there wouldn't be a push for muni BB.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
dslextreme
Premium,VIP
join:2001-02-23
Canoga Park, CA
1 edit | Affects BPL
Has anyone stopped for one moment to think that at least some BPL deployment will be muni based?
Here in Los Angeles we have the "department of water and power" run by the city. Should they not be allowed to offer Broadband over Power Lines?
The FCC is really talking up BPL as the holy grail for competition, but is allowing many states to enact laws banning "muni competition". How can we have BPL if it's banned? (let alone the fact that it has yet to be proven to work). The FCC is really starting to look like the political arm of the telco and cable companies and it is becoming painfully evident. |
|
Goldman
join:2002-06-21
Maumelle, AR
1 edit | Harsh assessment
That's an extremely harsh assessment of the Heartland Institute. They attempt to cut through the politically correct, socialist agendas that politicians and bureaucrats are continually shoving down our throats and tell the truth for a change. It isn't politically correct to say that taxpayers shouldn't pay for FTTH for everyone in the country. It isn't politically correct to say that broadband isn't a right in this country, it isn't politically correct to say that people need to work for the things they want rather than expect things to be handed to them by others. The final cost of taxpayer supported broadband will be astronomical by the time government gets through with it, and no matter what they tell you, broadband is not a necessity. |
|
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | Utter nonsense.
These groups exist with one purpose: protecting their master's profit margins, and convincing consumers that it's good for them. |
|
11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
| reply to Goldman
Take your argument, travel back in time about 100 years, and proceed to say the same thing about telephone service.
Then look at how far this country came and how we became a pre-eminent superpower because of our advancements in technology. Our so-called "socialist" approach to telephone service enabled this country to dominate the world.
We were able to advance our society in a way never seen throughout history. The advent of the telephone, and our attitude towards making sure that almost everyone had access to it (monetarily and physically), is probably the primary reason we're not under Hitler's control at the moment (or his successor).
Believe it or not, internet access is the "new" telephone and needs to be treated as a necessity for our citizens. We cannot advance as a society and an industrial nation if we continue to fall behind other countries in broadband deployment and accessibility.
It's not just about porn and movies and music. That's a significant amount of the traffic, but we'll fall as a nation if we don't address this important problem.
--
Join me and those that think as I do. Revolt against the powers that be. Tell them that they are hypocrites. Let them know that their control is weak and pointless. Urge them to let us evolve into our own society and flourish as we should. |
|
Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| reply to Goldman
the corperations are also scared of having to compete, look at that article further down where a cable co had to offer cheaper services because the town had its own triple play. Competition isnt compatable with the monopolies that the execs of these companies are used to.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports |
|
brisonic
join:2001-08-05
San Diego, CA
| reply to oliphant
Re: It's simple folks...
There's at least a bit of truth to this, everyone wants bandwidth for "free", when in reality it is paid for by someone upstream, some government, company, Robin Hood income redistribution via taxes, or a user. Something with value shouldn't be given away for free except in cases of charity. Bandwidth has a price, as do most things of value. Want some, step right up, with the ability to pay for it. These efforts will certainly drive prices even lower. But, how much lack of quality can you gripe about if you aren't paying for it at all. |
|
Corvus
Flaming Tards Since 2003
Premium,VIP
join:2003-11-26
| reply to Goldman
Re: Harsh assessment
Communism is everywhere on broadband, keep your eyes open. 
--
Capitalist surrendered to me, the bad left winger.  Victory is mine! |
|
jsinaiko
Premium
join:2001-04-25
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Midwest
| LOL  Best I've seen yet! I bet the Heartland Inst. idiots believe it too.
I still think it's ironic that this bunch of numb-nuts is in Chicago, the bluest of blue cities in a very blue states.
These guys never quit - they just keep on spewing out their horsedooky.
--
Illigitimati non carborundum |
|
Penguins
Have You Played Atari Today?
join:2001-12-01
Cleveland, OH
1 edit | Heartland Instutute
Neo-con shill orginization.
These are the same idiots who want to create a new slave class by shutting down all public schools. |
|
pcscdma
Chocobo Chocobo Random Battle
Premium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA
clubs:
| ok
"Informed, honest debate over municipal broadband is rare."
At last, something the Heartland Institute says that I agree with!
++++
Look at a link that was on the same page -
»www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mp···/3072809
now scroll to the bottom
LOL!
--
"The bad news is that we are told that Michael Powell, one of Washington's better bureaucrats, is calling it quits today after four years at the helm of the Federal Communications Commission." - WSJ 2005/01/21 |
|
joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| reply to jvigier
Re: Hmmm...this sounds familiar
said by jvigier  :I know these kinds of people, who use lies, deceit and any other means necessary to fightt anything and everything that doesn't put loads of cash into their wallets...where I come from we call "extreme right" Really? I just call them "politicians". |
|
woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | one word
shills |
|
Shadye
Premium
join:2004-10-21
Fallbrook, CA
| reply to 11337845
Re: Harsh assessment
So you're saying that it's impossible for a free market to take on large projects? I doubt telephone service to nowhere, USA caused us to defeat the germans through industrial output. And you can't say that private venture would not have worked to connect LA & NYC, etc.
I guess this is just a larger argument of freedom vs state run (authortarian).
While I don't think government broadband is a good idea, I really don't like the idea of state government telling muni government they cannot deploy FTTH. |
|
Bill
Light Up The Halo
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-09
clubs:
| reply to joebear29
Re: Hmmm...this sounds familiar
said by jvigier :I know these kinds of people, who use lies, deceit and any other means necessary to fightt anything and everything that doesn't put loads of cash into their wallets...where I come from we call "extreme right" Of course, the "extreme right" are the only ones who use these tactics 
--
The new Secure-Wifi.net is open!
|
|
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| reply to brisonic
Re: It's simple folks...
As I see it consumers are looking for 3 things...product availability/deployment, provider choice and freedom not from having to pay, but simply freedom from the profiteering that is commonplace with double digit rate increases and/or cuts in service.
While I don't think muni BB should be forced upon taxpayers if a municipality puts on a ballot a bond measure to fund deployment that is paid back by revenues, the people should have that option.
Personally I think the optimal situation for munis is line sharing. The bond pays for the deployment, then private content providers provide service paying the muni a lease or delivery fee per customer that pays back the bond. Then you have content providers trying to undercut each other because the margin isn't a given. And when one provider wants to cap you, their email sucks, their TOS/AUP is restrictive or their latest price increase is the last straw...you're only a phonecall away from switching.
Then from this you kill the monopoly and the likes of Time Warner, SBC or even smaller ISPs like Sonic.net and DSL Extreme have access to customers of another incumbants area.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com |
|
11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
| reply to Shadye
Re: Harsh assessment
My statement is completely rhetorical and based on no study whatsoever. Regardless, logic dictates that I'm right.
Is it chance that the original country that socialized "utilities" like telephone service, water, electricity, etc. became the most powerful and wealthy nation in the world?
It's like increasing your chances in the lottery. If only 10% of our citizens have every advanced technology at their disposal, the amount of people that will excel and help this country grow will be low. If we make sure that 90% of our citizens have those same things, we just created 9 times as many geniuses that can capitalize on their God-given talent.
The telephone could've been invented before Bell came along. In fact, I believe that Benjamin Franklin had the genius that would have allowed him to do so. So then, why did he not? Because he simply didn't have the resources available to make that discovery first.
When you really think about this, it'll f*ck with your head. 
--
Join me and those that think as I do. Revolt against the powers that be. Tell them that they are hypocrites. Let them know that their control is weak and pointless. Urge them to let us evolve into our own society and flourish as we should. |
|
gilgamesh0
join:2003-12-01
Seattle, WA
| reply to Minister
Jeez, guys. Went and had a look at this think tank's site about their funding, etc.:
»www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=10582
»www.heartland.org/FAQArticle.cfm?faqId=7
Doesn't look any worse than most policy think tanks (sounds like they were more open than most in the past)... At any rate, this sort of criticism doesn't begin to cut it. How about focusing on the actual study in question, instead of this "corporate shill" (or "government shill", in other cases) nonsense? Unless there is specific evidence of bias, this kind of accusation invariably detracts from the conversation, rather than assists it. While I've seen the righties do this, too, I have to say that this seems to be more the lefties' favorite game, and it is pretty sad.
Moreover, even if a study is indeed an *industry* study (or industry commissioned) -- i.e. one where clearly the funders have a monetary interest -- you note that fact, certainly, but it is not ipso facto bogus, and simply dismissible because of that. I love how independent orgs (lefty or righty "public interest" groups) claim their studies to be pure, because they have no monetary bias -- but somehow their ideological perspective (the very reason for their existence) has no effect on this "purity"? On the contrary, I'd say the ideological commitment can have an even stronger effect.
From what I can see, this Heartland Insititute has in fact more of an ideological motivation than financial. And that is not per se a reason to dismiss their study out of hand (any more than for of any of these other groups). Let's focus on evaluating the actual study, folks, shall we?
--Adam |
|
11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
| said by gilgamesh0 :I love how independent orgs (lefty or righty "public interest" groups) claim their studies to be pure, because they have no monetary bias -- but somehow their ideological perspective (the very reason for their existence) has no effect on this "purity"? On the contrary, I'd say the ideological commitment can have an even stronger effect. In a country whose God is money, you will see the evidence mount. Congratulations on an excellent and thought provoking observation.
--
Join me and those that think as I do. Revolt against the powers that be. Tell them that they are hypocrites. Let them know that their control is weak and pointless. Urge them to let us evolve into our own society and flourish as we should. |
|
